He is here again, and he should know that he was treated better than me (he wasn’t banned or suspended) but he too shall know that some arguments are taboo. I do all my battles on 23andMe, where I am more free. Someone asked my banishment, but probably there the situation is different. You Rich gave some good suggestion to me. Give it also to Mike, and he will write again and this is what we all desire.

Ciao, my sample geno 2.0 finally arrived in Houston. Had been sent, by registered mail from Italy, Oct. 25.Had been shipped to USA October 29 and received by the laboratory NatGeo last November 15. Better late than never! I hope soon to be able to compare the data with other L20 + project as Gilbert U152. We look forward to.Giuseppe.

He is here again, and he should know that he was treated better than me (he wasn’t banned or suspended) but he too shall know that some arguments are taboo. I do all my battles on 23andMe, where I am more free. Someone asked my banishment, but probably there the situation is different. You Rich gave some good suggestion to me. Give it also to Mike, and he will write again and this is what we all desire.

Treated better than me also. I was banned for a week with threat of permanent bandishment. This right after I sent a message requesting removal of my entry in a worldfamily surname project. I do not believe everyone is treated equally here. Some are untouchable in my view.

Aside from that,|I am waiting in the wings to see what can be learned from Geno 2 results, before I spend the money on testing.

I would highly recommend that everyone read Roberta Esres blog on the FTDNA conference.It is well written, compelling and funny. Highlights include Spencer Wells update on Geno 2.0, Thomas Krahn, Michael Hammer and Bonnie Schrack made an amazing discovery on the base A Haplogroup with huge implications for the age and origin of mankind and an interesting presentation from Dr. Tyrone Bowes on finding an Irish or Scottish ancestors location based on recurring family names. The quality of all the presentations was very high. Roberta, CeCe Moore, Emily Aulicino, and Katherine Bourges provided a constant Twitter feed from the conference on #ftdna2012 which allowed me to follow it live from Munich.

I would highly recommend that everyone read Roberta Esres blog on the FTDNA conference.It is well written, compelling and funny. Highlights include Spencer Wells update on Geno 2.0, Thomas Krahn, Michael Hammer and Bonnie Schrack made an amazing discovery on the base A Haplogroup with huge implications for the age and origin of mankind and an interesting presentation from Dr. Tyrone Bowes on finding an Irish or Scottish ancestors location based on recurring family names. The quality of all the presentations was very high. Roberta, CeCe Moore, Emily Aulicino, and Katherine Bourges provided a constant Twitter feed from the conference on #ftdna2012 which allowed me to follow it live from Munich.

Emily Aulticino has given additional details on the FTDNA conference on her Genealem blog including two new tests from DNADTC, FTDNAs sister division. The DNADTC division is the first commercial company to offer a full genome sequence test! The price is $5495, but we know that will be lower in a few years. For the Exome, your 20,000 genes, the cost is $695. She gives updates on Spencer Wells presentation of Geno 2.0 and gives good coverage of the history making A00 haplogroup.

Rumor has it that somebody in a U106 group got GenoChip results today.

Edit: actually somebody reported to a U-106 Yahoo group that somebody mentioned on a 23andMe forum that results had arrived. Turns out, it was a woman -- so no Y-DNA result was reported there, yet. But anyway, someone has received GenoChip results...

Well, the process took a lot shorter than I expected - in the last 24 hours, my status has been changed to 80% Complete. My kit is now in the Quality Control stage. I suspect the kit may have been previously sequenced and the status updated only after Spencer Wells gave his presentation on Geno 2.0. Either way, I will report the results, and more importantly the format as soon as I get them.

How long did it take for it to go from Stage 1 Sample Received to Stage 3 DNA Analysis? They reported receiving my sample Oct 30. Now 10 days later on Nov 9 it is at Stage 2 DNA ISOLATION.

It's a lot like the results of Dienekes Dodecad calculators or Doug McDonald's analysis without having to know how to use the Dodecad calculator or have Doug analyze it. Therefore, Geno 2.0 results are good for the people that don't know how to get that done. Plus, it's cheaper than FTDNA, other than sales, and 23andme. It's also better than Ancestry.com since they don't even provide reference population data or provide raw data for download.

On another point, since the majority of us are of mixed ancestry it should be left up to the individual to attempt to determine why they match certain populations and not be told they match a certain reference population regardless of the fact that they notify the participant that it doesn't mean they belong to those groups or are directly from those regions. If they are not from those populations or don't have ancestry from the locations there is absolutely no reason to mention that their final results match them.

No one could look at this woman's results and choose German over Greek. No one. Absolutely astonishing.

Hopefully, this woman knows her ancestry, or has a pretty good idea of it. If not, she has been completely mislead even with a disclaimer.

They can't make this obvious mistake often without changing something. Perhaps they could go outside the building and grab someone off the street, show them the results, and have them make the obvious choice.

The screen shots posted by CeCe and AuntSha are quiet interesting.I have asked them if their maternal haplogroup has improved eg. U4 to U4a. I am interesting in seeing what the effect will be on Paternal Haplogroups. I would ask others who receive their results to post their Haplogroup assignments here and indicate any change from their current Haplogroup assignment.I was dismayed to see that the raw data appears to contain a mish mash of different standards, some I recognised IMS-... which are on the ISOGG Tree and others 101SNP..... I have never seen before. This does not help interoperability between the testing companies.I would also like to see a seperate reference population for Ireland as it can be quite different from the UK profile. Ireland is a interesting case study and benchmark as it has some of the the highest frequency for several haplogroups important in the peopling of Europe (in particular Celtic migrations) including R1b-M269, L51, L11, P312, L21 and M222.

I was dismayed to see that the raw data appears to contain a mish mash of different standards, some I recognised IMS-... which are on the ISOGG Tree and others 101SNP..... I have never seen before. This does not help interoperability between the testing companies.

Yes, but that's how these "shorthand" or "tree" names are created. The discovering lab/organization names them independently. There's no formal overarching standards organization for this emerging industry, although they could certainly do with one.

The ISOGG tree would certainly be messy with names like 105SNP16284RA_G pasted throughout it, but I gather those are autosomal SNPs.

Below is a more detailed coverage of DF21, my terminal SNP, courtesy of David Reynolds. The depth is fine as it includes DF5 which is four levels below L21. The main gap appears to be the "S" Series. Does this mean that certain labs are not releasing their data and are therefore not included in Geno 2.0 or did they not make the November 2011 cutoff date?

Below is a more detailed coverage of DF21, my terminal SNP, courtesy of David Reynolds. The depth is fine as it includes DF5 which is four levels below L21. The main gap appears to be the "S" Series. Does this mean that certain labs are not releasing their data and are therefore not included in Geno 2.0 or did they not make the November 2011 cutoff date?

...The main gap appears to be the "S" Series. Does this mean that certain labs are not releasing their data and are therefore not included in Geno 2.0 or did they not make the November 2011 cutoff date?

The S series SNPs are from Jim Wilson (formerly EthnoAncestry, now ScotlandDNA, BritainDNA, etc.) Unfortunately, he does not publish the locations or primers for his SNPs, so it is impossible to include them in the GenoChip (or any other product, for that matter)

Below is a more detailed coverage of DF21, my terminal SNP, courtesy of David Reynolds. The depth is fine as it includes DF5 which is four levels below L21. The main gap appears to be the "S" Series. Does this mean that certain labs are not releasing their data and are therefore not included in Geno 2.0 or did they not make the November 2011 cutoff date?

Sounds like DF21 fared pretty well in the Geno 2.0 because it was discovered early enough to make the cut off.

For many of the rest of us, however, Geno 2.0 looks like a big dud.

Some current DF13+ guys might invest in it as a more extensive and slightly more expensive Deep Clade, with some added mtDNA and autosomal benefits. It's probably not too bad a deal for that.

I did a quick analysis of the coverage of P312. It is not a pretty sight. There is far more orange than green.I would estimate <50% of SNPs downstream of P312 are in the Geno 2.0 raw data file.Glaring omissions are P312, DF27, DF13, as well as M269 upstream.DF21 and U152 have good coverage, the rest have big gaps.I counted 11,542 Y SNPs. I only hope that some of these compensate for the apparent gaps in P312.I believe it will take at least until the end of January to update the ISOGG Tree.Bottom line, I am not impressed.